POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

I know how Rob has felt in the past about the claim of their being an object on the bottom of the plane purported to be Flight 175. And he ain't for it. But I figure since we have pretty solid evidence that the plane that hit the South Tower appears to be swapped out with a modified, high-speed, remoted guided aircraft a' la Operation Northwoods that I should post a credible examination of this object on the bottom of the alleged "Flight 175", which just so happens to include response from Boeing. I am putting this here for reference also.

La Vanguardia (Spanish for The Vanguard)[2] is Catalonia's leading daily newspaper as well as the fourth best-selling in Spain. It has its headquarters in Barcelona, Catalonia's largest city.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Vanguardia

QUOTE

The Plane that Crashed Into The South Tower Of The World Trade Center Shows Shapes Of Unknown Origin

By Eduardo Martín de PozueloLa Vanguardia - SpainJune 22, 2003[Translated into English; original in Spanish below]

BARCELONA - One and a half years after 9/11 many questions remain as to the circumstances surrounding the attacks on the Twin Towers. One of these unknowns is the nature of certain forms or marks which can be seen on the fuselage of the plane which crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center. "La Vanguardia" asked Boeing about these marks, who claimed they were unable to respond for reasons of national security and referred it to the independent commission which has been conducting an inquiry since 31 March into what happened.

In the frozen images of various film shots of the final run of United Airlines flight 175, there are three strange shapes discernible, which the aeronautical experts consulted find difficult to explain. They consist of two long shapes located underneath the fuselage, one towards the bow and the other towards the stern of the plane. There is a third, seemingly pyramidal in shape, on the underbelly, almost in the center of the plane. Boeing's department of commercial aviation, with headquarters in Seattle, examined the photographs for ten days and, having announced an explanation for the phenomenon, declined to make a statement on what it saw. Finally a spokesman stated that Boeing was unable to offer an opinion "for security reasons" and because it had not officially participated in the investigation of the attacks.

Various aeronautical engineers at official Spanish centers have found no clear explanation for the reflections or shapes which can be observed on the hijacked plane. However, a contour-detection digital analysis of the stills, carried out at the Escola Universitària Politècnica de Mataró, concludes that the "objects discerned cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun upon the plane as they always appear as the same shape and size, although their luminosity varies." This result was reached having subjected the photographs to a digital image process "which would respond to changes in luminance" which can be seen with the naked eye and which, in principle, would make no sense, given that the fuselage of commercial airplanes is cylindrical and flat, according to the cited technical report.

The author, who has had extensive professional experience in digital image processing, artificial neuronal networks and biometry, says in the report that "the same treatment" was applied to each of the photographs "using three standard digital image processing algorithms", the technical data of which are detailed at length in the dossier. Having clarified that "the images studied are taken from different angles of observation", it establishes that the "objects detected present distinct luminosity as they are in relief" and adds that "this is the only possible explanation", finally pointing out that "the objects detected can be clearly distinguished from the landing gear."

The reconstruction of the events leading up to the horrific attack on the second tower show that preparations for the United Airlines flight UA-175 from Boston to Los Angeles were routine on the morning of 11 September 2001. The aircraft, a B-767-222, registration N612UA, left the United terminal at Logan International airport at 7:58 and was in the air by 8:15. There were 56 passengers on board, including five Al Qaeda terrorists armed with box-cutters. The captain was fifty-year-old, ex-Naval pilot, Victor Saracini.

The aircraft followed its usual route until 8:47, when, at the level of George Washington bridge, which joins the north side of Manhattan to New Jersey over the River Hudson, it changed course veering sharply left. The hijackers, having slit the throats of several stewardesses, had taken control of the cockpit. For twelve minutes the Boeing flew over the Hudson following its western shore, until it again made another tight left turn. Right before it was the south tower of the World Trade Center, into which it crashed at 9:03.

At the time live television cameras were broadcasting a fire in the north tower, caused by the impact of an American Airlines B-767 which had taken place at 8:48. Millions of viewers witnessed live the UA-115 (sic) fly into the south tower, between floors 78 and 84, causing a much greater explosion than the one caused minutes earlier by the American Airlines plane.

The official investigation by the Federal Aviation Authority determined that the Boeing crashed into the building at a velocity of 937 kilometers per hour. Another study by the Massachusetts Technology Institute, however, established a speed of 859 kilometers per hour at the moment of impact.

Neither of the two investigations mentioned there was any strange form attached to the aircraft. Their conclusions form part of the half million documents serving as a departure point for the ten members of the national commission looking into the causes of the attacks.

The commission began its investigations at the New York Port customs building. Its objective is to continue the investigation started by the Joint Senate-House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. Before handing over to the national commission, the committee identified several human and organizational errors which had hindered work by the intelligence services to prevent the attacks. The White House then tried to get ex-Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, to preside the commission. Having failed to achieve this, it then cut off financing and the commission has still not received the eleven million dollars budgeted for their work. The commission, which has the support of both the Democrat and Republican parties, is due to present its conclusions to Congress in May 2004. The families of the 2,798 people who died on 9/11, 1,095 of whom were in the south tower of the World Trade Center in New York, will have to wait until then for concrete answers as to how the biggest attack the United States has ever suffered was carried out.

After having first seen those unusual contours on the airplane's belly, I am still of the opinion that the airplane was a modified 767.

My theory is that the modification is part of the work necessary to convert the 767 into tanker configuration, and if records here at PFT are accurate, my guess would be that the airplane was one of a batch of about 24 that were delivered to USAF at McDill AFB by one of the companies owned or controlled by Dov Zakheim.

There was a long running controversy at the Pentagon and in the press during the 90's regarding which airplane would replace the KC-135 and the KC-10, the 2 tankers in the USAF inventory. A modified 767 was the favorite candidate, and apparently some were modified by Zakheim's company in Israel.

The KC designates a tanker. KC-135 was a modified Boeing 707. KC-10 was a modified Douglas DC-10.

To my knowledge, the 767 was talked about as a replacement for the older aircraft but was never given a designation as such. Zakheim's company delivered about 25 of candidate (prototype, if you wish) aircraft to the USAF from Israel.

It is my theory that perhaps 2 out of that batch of 25 were used that day, only as a POSSIBLE explanation for the external bulges/fairings we see.

The KC designates a tanker. KC-135 was a modified Boeing 707. KC-10 was a modified Douglas DC-10.

To my knowledge, the 767 was talked about as a replacement for the older aircraft but was never given a designation as such. Zakheim's company delivered about 25 of candidate (prototype, if you wish) aircraft to the USAF from Israel.

It is my theory that perhaps 2 out of that batch of 25 were used that day, only as a POSSIBLE explanation for the external bulges/fairings we see.

FILE PHOTO -- The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System is a joint Air Force - Army program. The Joint STARS uses a multi-mode side looking radar to detect, track, and classify moving ground vehicles in all conditions deep behind enemy lines. The aircraft is the only airborne platform in operation that can maintain realtime surveillance over a corps-sized area of the battlefield. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Shane Cuomo)Download HiRes

Mission The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or Joint STARS, is an airborne battle management, command and control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platform. Its primary mission is to provide theater ground and air commanders with ground surveillance to support attack operations and targeting that contributes to the delay, disruption and destruction of enemy forces.

Features The E-8C is a modified Boeing 707-300 series commercial airframe extensively remanufactured and modified with the radar, communications, operations and control subsystems required to perform its operational mission. The most prominent external feature is the 27-foot (8 meters) long, canoe-shaped radome under the forward fuselage that houses the 24-foot (7.3 meters) long, side-looking phased array antenna.

The radar and computer subsystems on the E-8C can gather and display detailed battlefield information on ground forces. The information is relayed in near-real time to the Army and Marine Corps common ground stations and to other ground command, control, communications, computers and intelligence, or C4I, nodes.

The antenna can be tilted to either side of the aircraft where it can develop a 120-degree field of view covering nearly 19,305 square miles (50,000 square kilometers) and is capable of detecting targets at more than 250 kilometers (more than 820,000 feet). The radar also has some limited capability to detect helicopters, rotating antennas and low, slow-moving fixed wing aircraft.

As a battle management and command and control asset, the E-8C can support the full spectrum of roles and missions from peacekeeping operations to major theater war.

Background

Joint STARS evolved from Army and Air Force programs to develop, detect, locate and attack enemy armor at ranges beyond the forward area of troops. The first two developmental aircraft deployed in 1991 to Operation Desert Storm and also supported Operation Joint Endeavor in December 1995.

Joint STARS supported NATO troops over Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1996, Operation Allied Force from February to June 1999, and Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003.

The 116th Air Control Wing is America's first "Total Force" wing. The former 93rd Air Control Wing, an active-duty Air Combat Command unit, and 116th Bomb Wing, a Georgia Air National Guard unit, were deactivated Oct.1, 2002. The 116th Air Control Wing was activated blending Guard and active-duty Airmen into a single unit.

The 116th ACW is the only unit that operates the E-8C and the Joint STARS mission. The 17th and final E-8C aircraft was delivered on March 23, 2005.

A radome is often used to prevent ice and freezing rain from accumulating directly onto the metal surface of the antennas. In the case of a spinning radar dish antenna, the radome also protects the antenna from debris and rotational irregularities due to wind. Its shape is easily identified by its hardshell, which has strong properties against being damaged.